Archive for the ‘Legal Issues’ Category

ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR COMMENTS ON THE HOROWITZ REPORT

Friday, December 13th, 2019

 

THE EPOCH TIMES

William Barr Has Suddenly Become Chatty—and He’s Provided Quite an Information Dump

Sharyl Attkisson
DCONTRIBUTOR
December 12, 2019
In each of two video appearances, on NBC News and at Wall Street Journal’s “CEO Council,” Attorney General William Barr provided the same basic information and views about the U.S. intelligence community’s actions against the Trump campaign in 2016 and 2017. A criminal investigation is underway and being led by U.S. Attorney John Durham.

Barr was motivated to make the public statements, he said, by the misreporting and confusion surrounding Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report issued on Dec. 9. It found serious government surveillance abuses but no evidence of political bias on the part of the offending FBI officials and agents.

Below are 24 points Barr felt the need to make after the release of the Horowitz report. (All of the information is attributed to Barr.)

1. Don’t expect Durham’s findings to be announced before late spring or summer 2020.
2. The FBI did spy on the Trump campaign. That’s what electronic surveillance is.

3. Regarding the FBI’s actions in surveilling Trump campaign associates, it was a “travesty” and there were “many abuses.”

4. From “day one,” the FBI investigation generated exculpatory information (tending to point to the targets’ innocence) and nothing that corroborated Russia collusion.

5. It’s a “big deal” to use U.S. law enforcement and intelligence resources to investigate the opposing political party, and I cannot think of another recent instance in which this happened.

6. Evidence to start the FBI’s investigation into Trump associates was “flimsy” from the start and based on the idea that Trump aide George Papadopoulos expressed he may have had pre-knowledge of a Democrat National Committee computer hack. However, it was actually just an offhand barroom comment by a young campaign aide described merely as a “suggestion of a suggestion, a vague allusion” to the fact that the Russians may have something they can dump. But by that time, May 2016, there was already rampant speculation online and in political circles that the Russians had hacked Hillary Clinton’s emails in 2014 and that they might surface. So the idea that Papadopoulos’s comment showed pre-knowledge of the Democratic National Committee hack and dump “is a big stretch.” 

7. It was “wrong” for the FBI to presume the Trump campaign was part of a plot. They should have gone to the campaign and discussed their suspicions.
Share

THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING IMPEACHMENT

Thursday, December 12th, 2019

 

The Incredible Shrinking Impeachment

The Democratic grounds for ousting Trump are weak—and damaging to constitutional norms.

By the Editorial Board     December 12, 2019

So that’s it? That’s all there is? After all the talk of obstruction of justice, collusion with Russia, bribery, extortion, profiting from the Presidency, and more, House Democrats have reduced their articles of impeachment against President Trump to two: abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. Honey, we shrunk the impeachment.

Democrats on the Judiciary Committee will vote as early as Thursday on the text of the two articles they unveiled Tuesday, and then they will rush it to the floor next week. It’s enough to suspect that Democrats understand they are offering the weakest case for impeachment since Andrew Johnson, that the public isn’t convinced, and so they simply want to get it over with.

***

At least Johnson was impeached for violating a specific statute, the Tenure of Office Act, by firing Edwin Stanton as Secretary of War. There was wide agreement that Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton violated criminal statutes. In this case Democrats don’t even try to allege a criminal act.

(more…)

Share

ROUGH MEN VERSUS SOFT LAWYERS

Sunday, December 1st, 2019

 

 

“Central View,” by William Hamilton, J.D., Ph.D.  William Hamilton, is a laureate of the Oklahoma Military Hall of Fame, the Oklahoma Journalism Hall of Fame, the Nebraska Aviation Hall of Fame, the Colorado Aviation Hall of Fame, and the Oklahoma University Army ROTC Wall of Fame. Dr. Hamilton’s Formula for Failure in Vietnam: The Folly of Limited Warfare was published on November 20, 2019.  To order, call toll free: (800) 253-2187 “Central View,” can also be seen at: www.central-view.com.

Rough men versus soft lawyers

When it comes to President Trump’s thinking about the Navy’s strange prosecution of Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher and some other SEALs, this quote from George Orwell comes to mind: “We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.”

Yes, our Navy SEALs, Delta Force operators, Army Rangers and Special Forces are very rough men who take exception to the beheading of innocents and to putting pilots in cages and setting fire to them. In fact, our rough men, who reek of macho-male toxicity, have been visiting violence on those who would do us harm.

That, however, did not sit well with some female lawyers inside the Navy’s JAG Corps who decided our rough men should be brought to heel. Apparently, thinking the ends justify the means, they got NCIS investigators to coach and shape the testimony of interviewees. They used malware to listen in on discussions between Chief Petty Officer Gallagher and his lawyer. They hid a video clearing Gallagher of murder. And when a Navy Corpsman, under a grant of immunity, confessed that he killed the POW, not Gallagher, they pressed the case anyway. The presiding judge had to admonish the prosecutors for misconduct.

Then, after Gallagher was tried under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) by a jury of his peers and acquitted of all charges except for posing in a photo showing a dead terrorist, the Navy tried to give the team of prosecutors Navy Medals of Achievement for losing their case-in-chief. Is it any wonder that these antics drew the attention of the Commander-in-Chief of our Armed Forces?

(more…)

Share

JOHN SOLOMON DROPS 28 FACTS CRUSHING DEBUNKED CONSPIRACY-THEORY NARATIVE

Monday, November 25th, 2019

 

 

Probably one of the best investigative reporters out there. Sadly this gives us a peak into the level of corruption that is found in the different agencies filled with career employees. And even more sadly little of this will get much attention or make headline news.
EXCERPT FROM THE ARTICLE: 

And so Lt. Col. Vindman, here are the 28 primary factual elements in my Ukraine columns, complete with attribution and links to sourcing. Please tell me which, if any, was factually wrong.

Fact 1Hunter Biden was hired in May 2014 by Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian natural gas company, at a time when his father Joe Biden was Vice President and overseeing US-Ukraine Policy. Here is the announcement. Hunter Biden’s hiring came just a few short weeks after Joe Biden urged Ukraine to expand natural gas production and use Americans to help. You can read his comments to the Ukrainian prime minister hereHunter Biden’s firm then began receiving monthly payments totaling $166,666. You can see those payments here.

Fact 2Burisma was under investigation by British authorities for corruption and soon came under investigation by Ukrainian authorities led by Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

Fact 3: Vice President Joe Biden and his office were alerted by a December 2015 New York Times article that Shokin’s office was investigating Burisma and that Hunter Biden’s role at the company was undercutting his father’s anticorruption efforts in Ukraine.

Fact 4The Biden-Burisma issue created the appearance of a conflict of interest, especially for State Department officials. I especially refer you to State official George Kent’s testimony hereHe testified he viewed Burisma as corrupt and the Bidens as creating the perception of a conflict of interest.His concerns both caused him to contact the vice president’s office and to block a project that State’s USAID agency was planning with Burisma in 2016. In addition, Ambassador Yovanovitch testified she, too, saw the Bidens-Burisma connection as creating the appearance of a conflict of interest. You can read her testimony here.

Fact 5: The Obama White House invited Shokin’s prosecutorial team to Washington for meetings in January 2016 to discuss their anticorruption investigations. You can read about that here. Also, here is the official agenda for that meeting in Ukraine and English. I call your attention to the NSC organizer of the meeting.

Fact 6: The Ukraine investigation of Hunter Biden’s employer, Burisma Holdings, escalated in February 2016 when Shokin’s office raided the home of company owner Mykola Zlochevskyand seized his property. Here is the announcement of that court-approved raid.

Fact 7Shokin was making plans in February 2016 to interview Hunter Biden as part of his investigation. You can read his interview with me here, his sworn deposition to a court here and his interview with ABC News here.

Fact 8: Burisma’s American representatives lobbied the State Department in late February 2016 to help end the corruption allegations against the company, and specifically invoked Hunter Biden’s name as a reason to intervene. You can read State officials’ account of that effort here

(more…)

Share

VIDEO – ATTORNEY GENERAL WILLIAM BARR – THE LEFT’S HARASSMENT OF PRESIDENT TRUMP

Wednesday, November 20th, 2019

 

VIDEO – ATTORNEY GENERAL WILLIAM BARR SPEAKING AT THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY   (fast forward the video  to approximately 28 for Barr to be speaking of “The Resistance”)
November 16, 2019    Posted By Ian Schwartz
Attorney General William Barr denounced the left for “constant harassment” of President Trump in a speech delivered Friday at the Federalist Society’s 2019 National Lawyers Convention.

“In waging a scorched earth, no-holds-barred war of ‘Resistance’ against this Administration, it is the Left that is engaged in the systematic shredding of norms and the undermining of the rule of law,” Barr said.

Share

OBAMA FIRED ALL BUSH APPOINTED AMBASSADORS IN 2008

Saturday, November 16th, 2019

 

Please share far and wide as we can’t let the Left push their false narrative.  By the way, how could a seasoned and supposedly tough ambassador be intimidated by one of Trump’s tweets.  Who would of thought that such a tough lady could be such a “snowflake” !!!   Nancy   Trump 2020 !     

FLASHBACK: President Barack Obama Fired All George W. Bush-Appointed Ambassadors in 2008

Former United States ambassador Marie Yovanovitch testified Friday about her dismay upon being fired by President Donald Trump, but it’s actually quite common for presidents to do so after taking office.

The State Department issued a December 2008 notice to Bush-appointed ambassadors to submit their resignations, effective when President Barack Obama took office in 2009, according to the Washington Post.

A State Department official told Agence France Presse at the time that demanding all previously appointed ambassadors resign was routine.

“It’s a normal procedure for ambassadors, career and non-career, to submit their resignations. And what happens is that all of them do,” the official said at the time.

Typically, some career ambassadors are later allowed to stay in place on a case by case basis until they are replaced.

Trump also issued a notice asking all Obama-appointed ambassadors to submit their resignations when he prepared to take office, which created controversy at the time, as it appeared that he would not allow extensions.

Yovanovitch was first appointed by Obama in 2016 and confirmed by the Senate. She was asked by the Trump-run State Department to stay on as an ambassador to Ukraine through 2020, but she was fired in May 2019.

Share

U.S. FINANCING CHINA’S WORLD DOMINATION PLANS

Friday, November 15th, 2019

 

This is an article you have to read as there is so much new information in it regarding China and how our financial markets are being used to finance China’s expansion of their technological and military advances.  Nancy
IMPRIMIS – HILLSDALE COLLEGE

Why and How the U.S. Should Stop Financing China’s Bad Actors

October 2019  • Volume 48, Number 10 • Roger W. Robinson, Jr.

Roger W. Robinson, Jr.
Chairman, Prague Security Studies Institute

Roger W. Robinson, Jr. is president and CEO of RWR Advisory Group and co-founder and chairman of the Prague Security Studies Institute. He earned a B.A. from Duke University and an M.A. from George Washington University. He served as senior director of international economic affairs on President Reagan’s National Security Council, where he was the principal architect of the secret economic and financial strategy that proved decisive to the defeat of the Soviet Union. He later served as chairman of the Congressional U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. Prior to his government service, he was a vice president in the international department of the Chase Manhattan Bank.

The following is adapted from a speech delivered at Hillsdale College on September 9, 2019, during a conference on the topic, “Understanding China.”

In the early 1980s, I served on President Reagan’s National Security Council. Prior to my time at the White House, I was a vice president at Chase Manhattan Bank, in charge of its USSR and Eastern Europe division. It was my job to assess the creditworthiness of the countries in that part of the world, and I had come to realize that the Soviet Union had relatively modest hard currency income—and that what little it had came largely from the West.

In 1982, the Soviets had an empire stretching from Havana to Hanoi, but their hard currency revenue totaled only about $32 billion a year—roughly one-third the annual revenue of General Motors at the time. They were spending about $16 billion more annually than they were making, with the funding gap—the USSR’s life support—being financed by Western governments and banks.

President Reagan had long believed that the Soviet Union was economically vulnerable, because he knew it lacked the entrepreneurship, technological dynamism, and freedoms that are the prerequisites of a strong modern economy. And when he learned that we in the West were financing its brutal regime, he committed to slowing, and ultimately terminating, that flow of discretionary cash.

Our European allies had a completely different approach. Their belief in Ostpolitik, as the Germans called it, presupposed that commercial bridge-building would lead to geopolitical cooperation. If the West would offer financing and trade with the Soviets, peace and prosperity would result. Meanwhile, the Soviets were using the proceeds of Western loans, hard currency revenue streams, and technological support to build up their military, expand their empire, and engage in anti-Western activities.

The Reagan administration drew the line on a project called the Siberian Gas Pipeline, a 3,600-mile twin-strand pipeline that stretched from Siberia into the Western European gas grid. If completed, not only would it become the centerpiece of the Soviets’ hard currency earnings structure, but Western Europe would become dependent on the USSR for over 70 percent of its natural gas, weakening Western Europe’s ties to the U.S. and leaving the continent open to Kremlin extortion. Moreover, the pipeline was being financed on taxpayer-subsidized terms, since France and Germany viewed the USSR as a less developed country worthy of below-market interest rates.

The U.S. at the time had a monopoly on oil and gas technology that could drill through permafrost—which we had developed for Alaska’s North Slopeand we imposed oil and gas equipment sanctions on the USSR and European companies that were helping to build the Siberian pipeline. At one point, despite the strain it placed on relations with our NATO allies, we closed the U.S. market entirely to companies that continued to supply the pipeline project over our objections. Four of the six affected companies went under within six months, and Europeans woke up to the fact that they could do business with us or the Soviets, but not both.

As a result of these efforts we capped Soviet gas deliveries to Western Europe at 30 percent of total supplies, delayed the first strand of the pipeline by years and killed the second strand, and eventually helped dry up the bulk of Western credits to the USSR. In a secret deal, we also persuaded the Saudis to pump an additional two million barrels of oil per day and decontrolled prices at the wellhead in this country, knocking oil prices down to about $10 a barrel—significant because for every dollar decrease in the price of a barrel, the Soviets lost some 500 million to one billion dollars. In short, the Soviet Union never recovered from these economic and financial blows. It defaulted on some $96 billion in Western hard currency debt shortly before the total collapse of the Soviet empire.

The story with China today has certain similarities, but with one big difference: the U.S. has been playing the role of the naïve Europeans. Since adopting the Kissinger policy of engaging with China in the 1970s, our government has operated on the assumption that economic and financial relations with China would lead Beijing to liberalize politically. And since 2001, when we backed China’s entry into the World Trade Organization, the pace at which we have given China access to our best technology and capital and trade markets has accelerated. Yet China has shown no signs of embracing individual freedoms or the rule of law.

Instead, with our support, the Chinese have launched a massive campaign to become the world’s leading superpower. We know about the “Belt and Road Initiative,” a strategic undertaking to place huge segments of the world under China’s influence or outright control. We know about “Made in China 2025,” a strategy designed to dominate key technology sectors—from artificial intelligence and quantum computing to hypersonic missiles and 5G. We know about China’s practice of forced technology transfers: requiring American companies to share their trade secrets and R&D in order to do business in China. We know about China’s predatory trade practices. We know many of these things only because President Trump has brought them to the forefront of national attention, for which he deserves credit. And the ongoing tariff war is a good thing in the sense that we’ve finally begun to take a stand.

(more…)

Share

ERIC HOLDER TAKES VIRGINIA

Friday, November 8th, 2019

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Eric Holder Takes Virginia

The Democratic plan to dominate state legislatures has its first electoral success.

By Kimberley Strassel      November 8, 2019

Analysts are reading Tuesday’s tea leaves, predicting what the off-year election results mean for the presidential race. But one victory is beyond dispute. Former Attorney General Eric Holder will be celebrating this week for a decade.

Democrats on Tuesday won total control of Virginia’s government, adding both chambers of the General Assembly to the governor’s mansion. They will redraw Virginia’s legislative district lines after next year’s census. The Old Dominion was already moving left, though the redistricting power likely cements Democratic dominance over Virginia for the next 10 years.

This was Mr. Holder’s plan. While most prominent Democrats spent the months following Donald Trump’s election plotting future runs, Mr. Holder was launching the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, committed to domination of electoral mapmaking through the courts and legislatures. The NDRC spent its first years aggressively litigating legislative maps it didn’t like, to great success. Virginia’s election was the first test of the electoral piece of Mr. Holder’s strategy, and it will now serve as the model by which Democrats attempt to gain redistricting power in 11 other key states next year.

The NDRC claims its efforts are aimed at simple “fairness in the electoral system.” It says it’s working to overturn gerrymanders that “disenfranchise” voters. Don’t be fooled. Mr. Holder’s group has never engaged in blue states where Democrats routinely draw maps to disadvantage Republicans, such as Maryland, Massachusetts or New Jersey.

The NDRC is instead the Democratic version of the GOP’s success of a decade ago, the Redmap Project. Democrats, flush from Barack Obama’s 2008 victory, tuned out the state legislatures. Republicans used their inattention, along with a sweeping cash advantage and a backlash against the Obama presidency, to flip 21 state chambers in 2010, allowing them to dominate map-drawing after that year’s census. That power helped consolidate Republican control of state chambers and the U.S. House. Republicans might be flattered by Mr. Holder’s imitation—if they weren’t so busy getting crushed.

The Holder “sue to blue” litigation strategy has already yielded major gains for Democrats, as state judges struck down maps drawn by Republicans and required changes that ultimately aided the Democrats. Example: Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court—which is chosen through partisan elections and has a Democratic majority—in 2018 overruled the U.S. House maps drawn by the Republican legislature and produced its own version. The new maps helped Democrats flip three net seats. In Virginia, federal judges redrew the state legislative map to aid candidates running this week.

(more…)

Share

MUSLIM WOMEN CANDIDATES WIN IN VIRGINIA ELECTION

Friday, November 8th, 2019

 

Muslim Women Make History In Virginia Elections

November 6, 2019

Democrats Ghazala Hashmi, Abrar Omeish, Lisa Zargarpur and Buta Biberaj ― four Muslim women ― made history in Virginia’s elections on Tuesday.

In a surprise victory, Hashmi unseated incumbent Republican Glen Sturtevant for a state Senate seat; Omeish clinched one of three vacant seats on the Fairfax County School Board; Zargarpur was elected to the Prince William County School Board; and Biberaj, in a tight race, defeated Republican incumbent Nicole Wittmann to become Loudoun County’s new commonwealth’s attorney.

Hashmi is the first Muslim to be elected to the state Senate, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reported. (Two Muslim men ― Democrats Ibraheem Samirah and Sam Rasoul ― currently serve in Virginia’s General Assembly.)

Celebrating her win, Omeish said she was the youngest woman at age 24 and the first Libyan American to hold elected office in Virginia’s history. She also made claim to being the first Muslim woman to be elected in the state ― an honor she would share with Hashmi, Zargarpur and Biberaj.

All four were supported by the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

The women’s victories were part of the blue wave that swept Virginia on Tuesday. Democrats successfully flipped both houses of the state legislature. The election has been described as a possible “watershed” moment for the once-conservative Southern state.

“Today we sent a message that the status quo is no longer accepted,” a victorious Hashmi wrote on Twitter.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO – EPSTEIN COVERUP – PROJECT VERITAS

Thursday, November 7th, 2019

 

VIDEO  PROJECT VERITAS

VIDEO: Leaked ABC News Insider Recording EXPOSES #EpsteinCoverup “We had Clinton,

We had Everything”

“I’ve Had This Story for Three Years… (ABC) Would Not Put It on The Air” says Good Morning America Breaking News Anchor, and 20/20 Co-Anchor Amy Robach. “It Was Unbelievable… We Had – Clinton, We Had Everything…”
• Robach: “We Had Her Whole Allegations About Prince Andrew…I Got a Little Concerned About Why I Couldn’t Get On.”
• Amy Robach Describes How She Interviewed a Woman Who Had the Courage to Come Forward “Years” Ago About Epstein: “She Had Pictures, She Had Everything. She Was in Hiding for Twelve Years. We Convinced Her to Come Out. We Convinced Her to Talk to Us.”
• Robach Details ABC’s Initial Response to Her: “Who’s Jeffrey Epstein? No One Knows Who That is. This is a Stupid Story
• Robach: “Now it’s All Coming Out … I Freaking Had All Of It…”

(New York, NY) Newly revealed footage leaked by an ABC insider has exposed how network executives rejected allegations against Jeffrey Epstein years ago, even though there was content regarding the merit of those claims in-hand.

Amy Robach, ‘Good Morning America’ Co-Host and Breaking News Anchor at ABC, explains how a witness came forward years ago with information pertaining to Epstein, but Disney-owned ABC News refused to air the material for years. Robach vents her anger in a “hot mic” moment with an off-camera producer, explaining that ABC quashed the story in it’s early stages. “I’ve had this interview with Virginia Roberts (Now Virginia Guiffre) [alleged Epstein victim]. We would not put it on the air. Um, first of all, I was told “Who’s Jeffrey Epstein. No one knows who that is. This is a stupid story.”

She continues, “The Palace found out that we had her whole allegations about Prince Andrew and threatened us a million different ways.”

Robach goes on to express she believes that Epstein was killed in prison saying, “So do I think he was killed? 100% Yes, I do…He made his whole living blackmailing people… Yup, there were a lot of men in those planes. A lot of men who visited that Island, a lot of powerful men who came into that apartment.”

Robach repeats a prophetic statement purportedly made by Attorney Brad Edwards “…[T]here will come a day when we will realize Jeffrey Epstein was the most prolific pedophile this country has ever known,” and Disgustedly Robach states “I had it all three years ago.”

Project Veritas intends to continue its investigation into corruption in the Mainstream Media. We encourage that Brave insiders at these organizations come forward with any information they have, so that the public knows what is really going on within these media companies.

Share
Search All Posts
Categories